Skip to main navigation Skip to main content
  • E-Submission

Health Polit : Health Politics

OPEN ACCESS
ABOUT
BROWSE ARTICLES
EDITORIAL POLICIES
FOR CONTRIBUTORS

Page Path

  • HOME
  • ABOUT
  • Peer review process

Peer review process

Editorial Review and Publication

All submissions to Health Politics undergo a double-blind peer-review process to ensure scholarly rigor, fairness, and independence. Authors receive automatic confirmation upon submission and are notified by email of all editorial decisions. During review, authors may track the status of their manuscript through the journal’s online submission system.

Initial Editorial Screening

Upon submission, manuscripts are first assessed by the editorial office for compliance with the journal’s formatting and submission guidelines. Submissions that do not conform to these requirements may be returned to authors for technical revision prior to editorial consideration.

The Editor-in-Chief and/or a designated Associate Editor then conducts an initial assessment of the manuscript’s scope, originality, methodological rigor, and contribution to the field.

Service Levels

  • • Desk decisions (including desk rejection or referral for review) are targeted within 10 days of submission.
  • • For manuscripts sent for external review, the journal targets a standard review timeline of 90–120 days from submission to first decision.

These timelines represent editorial targets and may vary depending on reviewer availability and the complexity of the submission.

External Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass initial screening are assigned to expert reviewers selected based on subject-matter expertise, methodological competence, and absence of conflicts of interest. The journal typically seeks at least two independent peer reviews for each manuscript.

Reviewers are required to:

  • • Maintain strict confidentiality
  • • Declare any conflicts of interest
  • • Provide constructive, evidence-based evaluations

Following receipt of reviewer reports, the handling editor makes a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief, who issues the final decision.

Editorial Decisions

Decision letters fall into one of the following categories:

  • 1. Accept
    The manuscript is accepted for publication, subject to copyediting and production. Authors will review page proofs prior to publication. Accepted articles may be published online ahead of issue assignment.
  • 2. Minor Revision
    Authors are invited to submit a revised manuscript addressing reviewer comments. A detailed point-by-point response document is required. Minor revisions are typically expected within 4–6 weeks.
  • 3. Major Revision
    Substantial revisions are required before further consideration. Authors must submit a revised manuscript and a detailed response to each reviewer comment. Major revisions are typically expected within 6–8 weeks.
  • 4. Reject
    The manuscript is not suitable for publication. Rejection decisions are accompanied by reviewer and/or editorial comments to support transparency.

Editing and Production

Accepted manuscripts undergo copyediting to ensure clarity, consistency, and adherence to journal style. Authors are responsible for reviewing and approving final proofs prior to publication.

Corrections

Requests for post-publication corrections should be submitted to the editorial office. Corrections are reviewed by the editors and, when appropriate, published promptly and linked to the original article.